Forums

Planned Update - Later this Year Topic

Not sure if this was mentioned in prior posts. I would like to be able to set certain players in certain formations. For example, I would prefer a speedy back with sure hands in my trips set. Or a better passing qb in passing formations and a better runner out of the wishbone. etc.

I agree with most people wanting different depth charts for each formation, I also have really disliked the 50/50 split 60/40 ect. I preferred it much more when I could give each running back a number that proportionalized their touches relevant to one another, as I usually keep 6-8 RB on my roster I would like to be able to get carries to more guys than my #1 and #2 RB with a really uncontrolled number of touches for your fullback. I know changes to make it not as easy to run in one of the last major updates, however I feel that ease of control of touches was lost more than anything. When you used to be able to break it up so #1 got 40% #2 got 20% #3 got 20% #4 got 10% and #5 got 10% of the total touches, it was much easier to develop multiple RB when you carry about 8 at any given time.

Also, would like some sort of logic implemented like a benching, say if one particular RB carried it 10 times for 22 yards and RB # 2 carried it 6 times and has 45 yards. In real life #2 is gonna continue to get the carries that game until he screws up or is no longer effective. This could be accomplished at not only RB but at every position based on opportunities and successes vs failures weather it be a QB pass or a LB chance at a tackle. This however could become tricky in the sense that if your best DB is getting burned by a all-American WR, you don't want your worst DB coming in for him. Defense may be a little harder or even uncalled for, I mainly bring this up because I'm tired of having two very closely skilled players at QB, set them to 90% fresh pull (in hopes of figuring out who to go with in the second half, based on preformance) and have the starter go 3-14 while the back up who is very equal skill wise only gets 3-4 in opportunities. It would have to be in the form of an option for each position in the case that your starter is head and shoulders better than your backup as what qualifies for what's "bad performance" however I think that it would make things a loads more realistic.

Sorry for any grammar errors, most likely auto correct on this phone. More ideas to come once I get to a computer

Just throwing this out there: If we are going to add passing distribution to gameplan, we should also be able to add a type of "reverse" pass distribution, if that makes sense, in defensive gameplans. If a great wideout is getting targeted 20 times a game, an opposing defense needs to have the freedom to focus that much on him, so he doesn't over compensate for a group of other receivers who are mediocre. Am I making sense or is this just jiberrish? I know what I want to say, but everytime I say it, the words sound awkward.

Posted by chalvorson on 1/26/2012 12:15:00 AM (view original):Ability to select man or zone on defense. Ability choose frequentcy of blitzes. The ability to choose man or zone with specific blitzing by situation (i.e. down and distance) would open up the defensive game planning. Plus, man coverage would be more effective against short throws, while zone may help a defense counteract the effect of WR speed. The pluses and minuses of just man vs zone would make ne buy another 10-pack of seasons :)!!!

Add more description to the PBP...a lot more if possible. Why not enhance the PBP text with coaching notes which really tells us what happened during the play (i.e. OL Murray missed assignment allowing DL Akins to get pressure on the QB. Or, FB Anderson picked up the blitz giving the QB more time)

I would like few more players on the roster and possibility to RS 1 or 2 more ...
Possibility the get the ball the a playmaker like before ... Possibility to play man 2 man or zone on defense ...
Possibility to focus to a WR on defense, maybe to double him .
Over the 27 pages so far i have seen great ideas ... There s plenty of room for improvement to the game ...
It s a nice game and it could be even better with all that ... Sky is the limit here !!!

Can we also review the stamina for qbs? I have noticed that on a long drive, the QB often comes out even if the majority of the plays are handoffs. In a current game, my backup QB was in despite the previous seven plays being rushing plays. IMO, QB stamina should only be impacted by passing plays or scrambles.

Under the new system and old. Sniker. Can you do some thing about formation practice time. I practice 3 OF and 2 DF sets and SPT. I would like to practice and use at lest 4 OF and 3 DF sets. The way it is set up now I have to rob Petter to pay Paul in order to do this and would heart Formation IQ for 1 if not all formations.

Posted by robust_trex on 1/25/2012 5:55:00 PM (view original):Thanks for the hard work Norbert. You give us hope for the future.

Too Late. I've been trying to get by this and wait for the update but I've had enough. WIS is losing a 7 year customer. No skin off their back. I understand that. Just can't see putting another Dime into something that is broken.

Posted by norbert on 1/25/2012 11:14:00 AM (view original):I won't be working on the update quite yet, but I wanted to get the discussion started. We've basically been cleared for a few months of development for GD and it is going to focus on the Simulation Engine and Game Plans. For the engine, I'd like to concentrate on adding more cause and effect as well as adding to the output of the game. For game plans, I'd like to add more control on setting how your team plays and remove as much of the random play selection as possible, even if it means rebuilding how we set game plans altogether.

When it gets closer to the time when I can work on these things, I'll post with more info. I'd really like to hear more ideas on game plans. I know #1 add passing distribution, #2 add passing distribution, so let's start on #3 on down. There are a couple things I'd like to shoot for with game plans. They shouldn't require a billion options to set, and there should be simple settings that everyone can set quickly and advanced settings that people can tweak a little more only if they choose.

One avenue of game plan setting on offense I've been throwing around is a way to focus on plays and setting up options on each play and the conditions in which they are used, rather than looking at each situation (down and distance) and setting random formation and style selections. How this would work without violating the "don't set a billion options" rules, I don't know. Which is why I'm tossing the discussion out here.

I also think we can separate how you play the game from the plays you use. For instance, I'd like to be able to set something that says I want to be a passing team, or a rushing team, or open the game with passing and then work on rushing when passing starts being less successful. I think this would allow the coaches to really set up passing or rushing playbooks without hoping it just randomly comes out that way.

So please feel free to express any ideas you have or provide any concerns you have about setting up your game plans. Don't try to confine ideas to the current settings. At this point, work will probably begin around March with a few months of development and I'm planning on having around a month of beta testing on the update.

I realize this could lead to some big posts, so please try to keep them on topic.

Any chance we can fix players leaving early/NFL Draft? My QB left early only to go undrafted. Not the first time something like this has happened but the most extreme example being that he was QB on the National Runner Up